Big Battery EVs Under Fire

"Back in 2008, a lot of people thought higher (sales) numbers were achievable within 10 years," Michael Holman, a research director at Lux Research, told Design News. "But that's an area where people have come around to more realistic views. They're realizing that it might take a longer time, coupled with some fundamental scientific breakthroughs, before the battery costs get down to the level that's needed."

To be sure, the forecast isn't grim for all electrified vehicles. Plug-in hybrids, particularly those with smaller batteries, seem to have a better near-term outlook. By 2020, Lux Research predicts the auto industry will hit annual sales of 600,000 "light" plug-in hybrids (like the Prius PHV) and 150,000 "heavy" plug-ins (like the Volt). In contrast, Lux says sales of pure electrics will reach just 60,000 per year by 2020.

It's worth repeating that battery size plays a big role in those numbers. The Prius PHV, for example, employs a 4.4kWh lithium-ion battery (hence the higher sales forecast), while the Volt uses a 16kWh pack, the Leaf employs a 24kWh unit, and the Tesla Model S can reach as high as 85kWh. The bottom line is that the vehicles with massive battery packs generally have lower sales expectations.

None of this should be a surprise, of course. Bigger battery packs cost a lot more. And despite the ever-present hype around electric cars, consumers will usually reach for the more cost-effective solution first. "The economics of battery-electric cars don't make a lot of sense right now," Holman told us. "With hybrids -- even micro-hybrids -- you can get similar benefits in terms of reduced gasoline cost for a lot less money."

Great post kyleaf. yars and their like want to close their eyes when it comes to the true cost of oil. We just spent a $1 Trillion or more in the last decade on assuring that. I have a 60 mile round trip and my Leaf is handling that very well for the past one 1.5 years. The Leaf *CANNOT* be driven like a gas guzzling ICE and most intelligent EV owners know that. There is a bit of a compromise and adjustment in driving style. A high efficiency car needs to be driven appropriately as there is little margin for waste. A 25mpg car is less than 15% efficient in terms of converting the energy in gasoline to traction. The EV is over 90% efficient. IF you are an engineer you understand the implications of this. It costs me $1.10 to drive the 60 miles. No ICE will come close.

Amen, brother! There should be no government involvement in the marketplace. Period! Let supply drive demand. It has always worked in the past. I don't know any politician or bureaucrat who can decide for me what to wear, eat, or drive. None! Let the market drive production.

100 miles might be enough for some people. Plenty of people drive around our small town in golf carts. That is enough for them. I live 8 miles from a larger city with some hills between us. I would want something a little heftier than a golf cart.

I really need something that will go 200 miles reliably, as that is the most I drive 99.9% of the time (50% margin of error :-)). How hard can that really be? I bet most of this nation could get by happily with that. Especially if we could solar or wind charge it and not pay a utility monopoly.

naperlou, I own and drive an EV every day. I don't think that anything that you have posted before will convince me that what I do everyday isn't really happening.

I drive 2,200 miles per month at a cost of around $120.

It's true that without the state and federal rebates the car would not make as much financial sense. With the amount of driving that I do and the current price of gasoline, even with the unknown cost of the battery - I am saving quite a bit of money.

I take longer trips and since the charging infrastructure is so poor, I cannot drive an EV, however, that is slowly changing. Some EV owners are working on directly building-out the infrastructure because it makes sense for us to do financially vs. buying gasoline.

I think you nailed it, Tekochip. There are still a good number of people who want to see a big move toward environmentally friendly cars. But they're a minority. Most of us really want a good balance between cost and performance.

This is a excellent article and makes a valid point about the battery size versus cost, and why a hybrid is really the only EV running right now. The low range of an all electric vehicle would be fine for me, but of course our family could use my wife's car for long trips, since a full EV couldn't go the distance. That means that the consumer would have to be willing to pay a much larger price-tag for a vehicle that was capable of much less, and that simply won't happen.

The main problem with EVs is the ones that try to be like regular cars. There's a nice little niche market for "NEVs" (Neighborhood Electric Vehicles), which are licensed for use on streets and arterials but not on freeways and other high-speed roads. They are basically enclosed, comfortable electric golf-carts. They don't pretend to be suitable for inter-city travel, but they're great for in-town shopping and commuting.
The main thing electrical vehicles, and their marketeers, need is humility. Don't try to sell a million units the first year by claiming that they're just like a regular car, but more green. Market EVs of modest capability and modest cost for the niche where they're really good (the NEV niche). If at some point in the future it becomes feasible to make them go farther or faster, then evolve them in that direction. Meanwhile, let them do what they're good for, and stop trying to pretend they're something they're not.

The main problem with EVs is the ones that try to be like regular cars. There's a nice little niche market for "NEVs" (Neighborhood Electric Vehicles), which are licensed for use on streets and arterials but not on freeways and other high-speed roads. They are basically enclosed, comfortable electric golf-carts. They don't pretend to be suitable for inter-city travel, but they're great for in-town shopping and commuting.
The main thing electrical vehicles, and their marketeers, need is humility. Don't try to sell a million units the first year by claiming that they're just like a regular car, but more green. Market EVs of modest capability and modest cost for the niche where they're really good (the NEV niche). If at some point in the future it becomes feasible to make them go farther or faster, then evolve them in that direction. Meanwhile, let them do what they're good for, and stop trying to pretend they're something they're not.

I like the "here we go again" title of an earlier post. Anyway, tax dollars subsidizing oil drilling and the war in the middle east to allow us to have cheap oil are not worth mentioning, but a tax reduction that doesn't come out of your pocket is "self indulgence?" Okay, so we know where you are coming from. A Nissan Leaf with more than enough winter range enough for my wife's 38 mile RT commute that never needs to stop at a gas station on a cold, rainy day, yes, that is her self indulgence. I'm guessing you drive a 1985 Dodge Colt, because anything else would be self ingulgence, oh, wait! You ride a bicycle, becasue you don't want my tax money protecting your oil. Thanks a million for your concern! I'm glad you are not wasting one penny of the many thousands of dollars I pay in federal income taxes every year.

1,000 miles isn't the problem. 120 reliable all-weather miles is. That gasoline "bomb" in a traditional car explodes at a statistically insignificant rate, while inadequate battery storage is a problem 100% of the time.

When somebody produces a cost-competitive electric car that reliably can deliver 300 miles of all-weather range on a 30-minute charge, I'll give serious consideration to buying one. Until then, common EVs are useless to me, and I object to my tax dollars being used to subsidize the manufacturing of them or the purchase of them. The handful of people who want them already are buying them, and not one of the buyers I've met made his/her decision to purchase dependent upon a tax credit. Not even one. Driving around on local hops in an EV just makes them feel superior. There's nothing wrong with that. But neither you nor I should have to pay for their self-indulgence.

40 odd years ago Mallory/Duracell Canada produced a primary D cell with an energy density which matches the Lithium products of today. It was difficult to manufacture, but significantly outperformed anything on the market at that time. The application that it was designed for was highly specialized so its commercial viability was limited, and an alternative solution to the cold weather application was cobbled around existing product so the project was shelved. It was called the 10K63; it had a specialized anode and a development was in works to make a specialized cathode to further improve its performance. Admittedly it was a primary cell, BUT, the chemistry and structural changes did make it the most powerful D size cell in the world at that time. Perhaps if our States side cousins ferreted around in the Duracell archives they would find what it was all about and perhaps, just maybe, advance battery technology courtesy of the Canucks...how about it eh? (humour)

A few weeks ago, Ford Motor Co. quietly announced that it was rolling out a new wrinkle to the powerful safety feature called stability control, adding even more lifesaving potential to a technology that has already been very successful.

A well-known automotive consultant who did an extensive teardown of BMW’s i3 all-electric car said its design is groundbreaking in multiple ways. “We’ve torn down about 450 cars, and we’ve never analyzed anything like this before.”

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.